Jump to content

Talk:Philharmonia Orchestra/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: KJP1 (talk · contribs) 08:16, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pleased to undertake this. Should require less than the standard seven days. KJP1 (talk) 08:16, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Quick fail criteria assessment

[edit]
  1. The article completely lacks reliable sources – see Wikipedia:Verifiability.
  2. The topic is treated in an obviously non-neutral way – see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view.
  3. There are cleanup banners that are obviously still valid, including cleanup, wikify, NPOV, unreferenced or large numbers of fact, clarifyme, or similar tags.
  4. The article is or has been the subject of ongoing or recent, unresolved edit wars.
  5. The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint.

Articles passes quick-fail assessment. Main review to follow. KJP1 (talk) 09:59, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Main review

[edit]

1. It is reasonably well written.

a (prose):
The prose standard is high and it easily Passes. Just a few suggestions below:
Lead
  • "...of the Philharmonia's younger conductors," - does this actually mean younger in age, or later, or more recent? I see with Strauss, etc. it could actually mean shorter in the tooth, though Klemperer was actually older than Furtwängler.
Background
  • "Augmented to a septet" - was this temporary, as it's still being referred to as a quartet later in its history?
  • "the quartet continued to play in concert and on record during the Second World War" - forgive my musical ignorance but is this the same as "to make recordings"?
  • "their personnel and standards had been badly affected by war-time conditions" - not quite sure what this means. Their personnel had been depleted, or shell-shocked, or what?
  • That, certainly (London lost many more players in WW2 than in WW1) and the withdrawal of private sponsorship was also a major blow, as was the bombing of the capital's only decent concert hall, the Queen's Hall, leaving them semi-nomadic. I've redrawn. Tim riley talk 17:15, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
1950s: Karajan and Toscanini
  • "Legge realised that Furtwängler was in declining health and that sooner or later Karajan would succeed him as chief conductor of the Berlin Philharmonic and Salzburg Festival and be lost to the Philharmonia. Legge began to seek out suitable successors." - I wonder if this could run as one sentence, losing the double Legge; "Realising that Furtwängler was in declining health and that sooner or later Karajan would succeed him as chief conductor of the Berlin Philharmonic and the Salzburg Festival and be lost to the Philharmonia, Legge began to seek out suitable successors".
Late 20th century
  • "Dohnányi's conducting was regarded as reliable and musicianly, although sometimes rather cool" - again, forgive my ignorance, but I didn't know what it meant. Even after having looked it up, I'm not certain?
21st century
  • "Since 2000 the orchestra has established up further residencies" - I think the "up" is a hangover from an earlier version?
Recordings
  • "the Philharmonia played on a set of Purcell's Dido and Aeneas" - the set? Or in a as per the next sentence? Could just be my ignorance again.
b (MoS):
Just one MoS suggestion below, but nothing to preclude Passing:
Background
  • "He later set out his guiding principles" - are the bullets that follow a direct quote? If so, should they be in quotes, or in a quote box? You know MoS better than I.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

a (references)
References look impeccable, even if in that arcane, non-sfn, style!
b (citations to reliable sources):
Sources all good.
c (OR):
No indication of OR.
d (No evidence of plagiarism or copyright violations):
Earwig is happy and so, therefore, am I.

3. It is broad in its scope

a (major aspects)
Music is not my area of specialism, but the history is covered in detail, decade by decade, and nothing major seems missed. The Recordings section appears similarly detailed.
b (focused):
It focusses clearly on the orchestra and there are no digressions.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy

Content is Neutral with triumphs and tribulations fairly and fully described.

5. It is stable

Article is stable with no indications of edit-warring.

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
The images all look fine. Given he founded it, doesn't Legge warrant one? I see his article has an image, although not that good a one.
I can't find a free image of Legge, and I doubt if a non-free image can be justified as Fair Use here. Tim riley talk 17:21, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

b (appropriate use with suitable captions)
Captions all fine. Alt text, if you're planning an FAC?

7. Overall:

Neither the limited Prose suggestions, nor the one MoS query, stand in the way of Acceptance. Shall therefore Pass.

Thank you, KJP, for this review. I hope my two nolle prosequis, above, are acceptable, for the reasons I've set out. Tim riley talk 17:15, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tim - of course - they were only suggestions. It was easily GA. Are you planning an FAC? KJP1 (talk) 18:02, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No. This is the last of the five articles on the five London orchestras that I've taken to GA. I don't feel any of them need taking to FAC. They'll do as GAs, I think, although if anyone develops any or all for FAC I'll be an enthusiastic supporter. Tim riley talk 19:04, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Philharmonia_Orchestra/GA1&oldid=849401885"